Re: [PATCH 0/5] make slab gfp fair

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 09:29 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2007, Matt Mackall wrote:
> 
> > privileged thread                      unprivileged greedy process
> > kmem_cache_alloc(...)
> >    adds new slab page from lowmem pool
> 
> Yes but it returns an object for the privileged thread. Is that not 
> enough?

No, because we reserved memory for n objects, and like matt illustrates
most of those that will be eaten by the greedy process.

We could reserve 1 page per object but that rather bloats the reserve.

> > do_io()
> >                                        kmem_cache_alloc(...)
> >                                        kmem_cache_alloc(...)
> >                                        kmem_cache_alloc(...)
> >                                        kmem_cache_alloc(...)
> >                                        kmem_cache_alloc(...)
> >                                        ...
> >                                           eats it all
> > kmem_cache_alloc(...) -> ENOMEM
> >    who ate my donuts?!
> > 
> > But I think this solution is somehow overkill. If we only care about
> > this issue in the OOM avoidance case, then our rank reduces to a
> > boolean.

I tried to slim it down to a two state affair; but last time I tried
performance runs that actually slowed it down some.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/